Comments (13)
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
Looks like that first one, doesn't have a . on the end:
"Name": "*.foo.myzone.com",
"ResourceRecords": [
{
"Value": "test.myzone.com"
}
],Can you verify that's the case in the actual batch that's getting sent up and it's not just an accident from anonymizing to post?
If so I can take a look and try to figure out how that's coming about.
from octodns-route53.
anemyte
commented on July 4, 2024
Can you verify that's the case in the actual batch that's getting sent up and it's not just an accident from anonymizing to post?
Sorry, it is I who messed this up during anonymization. The dot was there in the original output.
I also noticed that the problem does not appear with Cloudflare, so this might be a Route53-specific problem.
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
OK. I'll have to mess around and create the situation and debug in detail. It is kind of sounding like something funky on the Route53 side, but that would surprise me.
from octodns-route53.
anemyte
commented on July 4, 2024
Thanks! Let me know if I can help.
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
I was able to confirm the behavior and it certainly does appear to be a bug on Route53's end. The verbatim batch of changes that was sent up to Route53:
{'batch': {'Changes': [{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-1.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-1.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-2.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-2.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-3.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-3.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-4.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-4.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-5.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-5.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}}],
'Comment': 'Change: 97b8313b5b93444d977567488e5ff81e'}}And after sending that change the verbatim rrsets returned from Route53 when querying the zone are:
{'rrsets': [{'Name': 'exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'ns-928.awsdns-52.net.'},
{'Value': 'ns-1133.awsdns-13.org.'},
{'Value': 'ns-1788.awsdns-31.co.uk.'},
{'Value': 'ns-282.awsdns-35.com.'}],
'TTL': 172800,
'Type': 'NS'},
{'Name': 'exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'ns-928.awsdns-52.net. '
'awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 '
'7200 900 1209600 86400'}],
'TTL': 900,
'Type': 'SOA'},
{'Name': 'cname-1.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-1.exxampled.com'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'},
{'Name': 'cname-2.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-2.exxampled.com'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'},
{'Name': 'cname-3.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-3.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'},
{'Name': 'cname-4.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-4.exxampled.com'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'},
{'Name': 'cname-5.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-5.exxampled.com'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}]}Results are unchanged 5-10m later. If I run it again. The 4 remaining changes are in the batch and only one of them gets updated.
This is a really funky one. If you have a Route53 support issue or contact/TAM please reach out to them with this issue and CC me, [email protected].
I no longer have a contact there, but will try and see if I can find someone.
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
In order to further test/debug I recreated the records w/o the .s and then added them in the config and also modified the TTL of all the records by setting a default on the provider. Batch for that verbatim:
{'batch': {'Changes': [{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-1.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-1.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 42,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-2.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-2.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 42,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-3.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-3.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 42,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-4.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-4.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 42,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-5.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-5.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 42,
'Type': 'CNAME'}}],
'Comment': 'Change: b75fbbb36d8f4ecd9e2a5fb6b51af308'}}With this all 5 records updated in the first go, rather than just the 1 above. I also verified that the same problem exists when going the other direction and removing the .s.
I also verified that it seems to be something specific about the . on the end. When I changed the www numbers:
{'batch': {'Changes': [{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-1.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-a.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-2.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-b.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-3.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-c.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-4.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-d.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-5.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-e.exxampled.com.'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}}],
'Comment': 'Change: 23d97d14ec69464e90c8768d24961b59'}}They all changed on the first go. I also tried changing the last character which worked fine.
{'batch': {'Changes': [{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-1.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-a.exxampled.comx'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-2.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-b.exxampled.comx'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-3.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-c.exxampled.comx'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-4.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-d.exxampled.comx'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-5.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-e.exxampled.comx'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}}],
'Comment': 'Change: b868ab08650c45d89e10ddc21f2e9500'}}I even tried appending a non-. character to see if it was something about appending to the end and that worked fine, so it really seems to be a problem with adding .s.
{'batch': {'Changes': [{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-1.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-a.exxampled.comxy'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-2.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-b.exxampled.comxy'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-3.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-c.exxampled.comxy'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-4.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-d.exxampled.comxy'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}},
{'Action': 'UPSERT',
'ResourceRecordSet': {'Name': 'cname-5.exxampled.com.',
'ResourceRecords': [{'Value': 'www-e.exxampled.comxy'}],
'TTL': 3600,
'Type': 'CNAME'}}],
'Comment': 'Change: 2f45babe57a043b08d2f1caf977a6e2f'}}from octodns-route53.
anemyte
commented on July 4, 2024
This is a really funky one. If you have a Route53 support issue or contact/TAM please reach out to them with this issue and CC me, [email protected].
Nope, I did not open a ticket there, I just brute-forced my changes instead :) Now that all records are fixed, I don't think this will be a major issue.
I suggest keeping this issue open to avoid similar questions, but I also don't mind if you close it.
In any case, thank you for your support!
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
So I have zero ability to file a support issue w/AWS given that I'm an individual with no support plan or anything. Not something I'm going to pay for. I wish they'd give me some credits to use when developing octodns-route53 as it currently costs me money to work on it :-/
Anyway, just realized this is in octodns/octodns and probably should live in octodns/octodns-route53. Going to move it there now.
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
Finally got around to posting to the forum https://repost.aws/questions/QUj9pIHHnyRIGKNJqjqLgaZQ/route-53-batch-of-changes-succeeding-but-only-making-one-of-the-changes. We'll see if that gets any traction. I wish I knew someone paying for support with a TAM...
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
Nothing on the AWS forum post, not surprised if you aren't paying for support it's nonexistent. Going to leave this open, but not holding out hope that it'll get addressed 😦
from octodns-route53.
anemyte
commented on July 4, 2024
I doubt that the support will be of any help in this case, we probably need a dev to see that ticket of yours. I think we might find better help by filing an issue in boto3, they say in their README.rst that
Boto3 is maintained and published by Amazon Web Services.
What do you think? I can file an issue there later this week if you think they might help.
from octodns-route53.
ross
commented on July 4, 2024
What do you think? I can file an issue there later this week if you think they might help.
Worth a try.
from octodns-route53.
github-actions
commented on July 4, 2024
This issue is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 7 days.
from octodns-route53.
Related Issues (20)
- AwsAcmMangingProcessor can't be referenced HOT 2
- Route53: dynamic record triggers update even with no changes to the record HOT 5
- Route53 pool with health check that doesn't match the cname HOT 1
- Public and Private DNS in Route53 HOT 4
- route53 with healthcheck record sync issue HOT 2
- OctoDNS bug when deleting domainkeys on Route53 HOT 1
- Ability to set FailureThreshold on healthchecks HOT 2
- Updating to 0.0.5 breaks previously existing ALIAS records HOT 7
- Latency Routing Policy HOT 3
- TCP health check failure HOT 1
- Does OctoDNS handle weighted Route53 records? HOT 3
- ALIAS records for Global Accelerator are not supported
- Need to add a space before ";" (semi-colon)? HOT 2
- Regression with `lenient` setting for multi-answer PTR record HOT 5
- ALIAS record dump issue HOT 2
- Is there a way to hide "root NS record supported"? HOT 7
- Feature Request: Add DS record support to octodns-route53 HOT 3
- Add option to turn off trailing dot enforcing HOT 2
- Does Octodns-route53 support sub-domain NS records HOT 3
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.
from octodns-route53.